1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

D6 Anybody?

Discussion in 'Nikon Chat' started by GeoffR, Sep 5, 2019.

  1. nimbus

    nimbus Well-Known Member

    It's only certain models that genuinely command higher prices, there are quite a number of chancers on Ebay asking batty money for some of these cameras. I'm glad I held onto my black Nikon FM2n, I bought an FE2 a while ago, which after having the seals replaced, replacing the broken eyepiece rubber and changing the screen which was marked (amazingly I found a mint one for £5 in a local market) is rather a nice camera. I do have an OM1n with three lenses and a couple of Konicas, the latter don't have a lot of value, although they are quite interesting.

    The cameras which don't really seem to have an great interest are most autofocus SLRs, I do have three Nikons, but I doubt all of themtogether would fetch much more than £50. I bought an F80 from a local trader, I asked him the price, he said £20, foolishly I said "if it had been a tenner", he then said "sold". It does have the advantage of being compatible with G lenses though.
     
  2. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    I have a black FM2n, F90 and F100. The least expensive of those new was the simple FMn2. The most expensive of those now is the FM2n. The rubbery coating on the more advanced machines has gone sticky. The FM2n was a backup reserve camera and is almost mint. Occasionally I put a battery in it for a day or two just in case there are electolytic capacitors in the exposure meter system, and also at the same time I exercise the shutter which is fully mechanical.
     
  3. nimbus

    nimbus Well-Known Member

    There is not a great deal that seems to go wrong with FM2s, n or otherwise. Most of what does can be fixed, the light seals deteriorate with age. Apparently the only other fault that is a reasonably regular occurrence after much use is the wind-on, but it is repairable (according to s repairer). The shutters seem to be fairly bulletproof. A friend has a pair that see regular use, one is ugly to say the least, it just keeps going though. He used to use screw-thread Pentaxes, changing to Nikon as these were steadily expiring-he has a shelf full of broken S1a and various versions of Spotmatics (never disposes of literally anything).
     
  4. JMK

    JMK Active Member

    Going back to original subject, the mirror-less cameras that I presume rely upon an electrical image to view what the lens sees, I have used a couple of them in the past and always found that the delay from what the lens sees being translate into what appears on the screen is always significantly different with a delay with the electronic image over the visual image of direct sight. This is of course my perception, others may differ.

    Camera shake by a hand held camera with a mirror, I would argue is a lot less likely with the mirror. The reduction in weight of a lighter body makes for a less stable 'gun platform' where hand holding the mirror less camera is more prone to shake and weight of the camera and lens has a strong advantage. Only very, very rarely do I get a problem with any of my Nikons in that respect any of the F6/F100/D700/D600. When I do it is always down to operator error.
     
  5. gray1720

    gray1720 Well-Known Member

    Let's face it, your average film Nikon was machined out of the stuff too heavy to be lifted into the Zenit factory, and some of the dSLRs are little better.

    My Nikkormat is definitely heavier than my Zenit 12 (I weighed them - how sad is that?) and when I picked up one of the plastic dSLRs in Jessops a few years ago, I almost punched myself in the eye with it, it was so light.

    Adrian
     
    El_Sid and AndyTake2 like this.
  6. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    Certainly the blanking period with electronic viewfinders, together with the image refresh rate, has improved immensely in tbe last couple of years. You'd be hard pressed to see it on the latest generation. I'll look seriously at the next generation Canon. The main advantage is being able to see the effect of the exposure setting directly.

    The lack of weight and reduction in size was an early selling point for mirrorless but now there are some larger models around. My Fuji XH-1 with grip attached isn't hugely smaller or lighter than my Canon 1Div, though the lenses are lighter. I'm not wholly convinced that a heavier camera is easier to hold still than a light one, it is mainly technique, but I share the preference for something solid. Not everyone does. LCE were selling the XH-1 with grip for £999.99 the other weekend, launch price was I think over £1800 and I thought I did well to get a mint s/h one for £1200.
     
  7. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    It is certainly the case that mass damps high frequency, low amplitude vibrations, such as that if an SLR's mirror but at low frequencies it can be fifficult to stop a larger mass.

    I won't say that mirror "slap" is a myth but on modern SLRs it isn't the problem many would have us believe. Certainly with the big Nikon bodies it isn't a problem given the way I use my cameras. I am prepared to believe it is a problem of others.
     
  8. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    For many years high end cameras with electronic finders have shown no obvious delay when compared against optical viewing systems. I base this on actually using more than a dozen different cameras with electronic viewing systems.
     
  9. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    I am prepared to accept that as fact but for the way I use a camera the optical view finder has advantages, not the least of which is that it uses no power.
     
  10. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    I'm sure that's entirely correct. What's more: there's no right or wrong in whatever camera you choose.

    I may have been a little sharp because I happen to believe it helps the world go round if people provide accurate information. I expect you would be especially aware of that.
     
  11. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    Indeed Andrew. Accurate information seems to be in short supply at the moment.

    I find the comment from a well known reviewer that "Electronic view finders are better than optical for everybody" or words to that effect, unhelpful. Fortunately it is merely opinion and I am at liberty to disagree. Sure an EVF can do things an optical finder can never do and I am sure many people find those things really useful. However, until an EVF can work without power it won't meet my requirements, hence the D6 will remain an aspiration.

    I am finding the general "switch to mirrorless" approach wearing. Unless those who are pushing mirrorless (other than the manufacturers) are going to pay me to change I'm not interested in doing so. That doesn't mean I am not interested in development in camera technology, far from it, but I do have to manage my budget and it doesn't include £4,000 for a body and one lens (Z6 and 24-70 f2.8). Nikon haven't announced the prices for the 70-200 f2.8 or the 14-24 f2.8 for the Z mount yet but I wouldn't expect them to be any cheaper than the F mount equivalents so that would be another £5,000. So a total of £9,000 to switch. By comparison £6,000 for a D6 seems a bargain.
     
  12. JMK

    JMK Active Member

    Electronic viewfinder versus the Mark 1 eyeball, hmmmm!

    I would say the Mark 1 eyeball would win every time. It still has to be improved upon.
     
  13. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    That's a particularly silly post, given you have to use your eyes to exactly the same extent on an EVF as an OVF.

    The difference, insomuch as there is any, is actually in your processing unit, not the eye.
     
  14. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    The difference is that in an EVF only part of the data reaching the sensor is available to the eye, in an OVF all the data is available to the eye. Until you enlarge the image in the finder when the EVF may well have an advantage.

    I have to agree with Nick, the EVF still depends on the Mk1 eyeball.
     
  15. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    I would disagree with that, but it's probably true for most people. The key component in our own optical systems isn't really the eye, but the brain, and it can do many and wonderful tricks. I am of the opinion that one of those tricks is to tell itself that when the delay is very small, that there is no delay at all, and somehow process the inputs from both eyes to be in synch. And that's where my problem cuts in, because my brain can't do that any more; my balance disorder was caused by damage to the inner ear, but left my brain unable to process the signals from it and my eyes. It's been reprogrammed by an exercise so I can function normally, except on extreme fairground rides (which I never liked anyway) and with some EVFs. I am hypersensitive to them, and have found only a few that I can use at all, and I;m pretty sure that lag is at least part of the issue. Sony are by far the worst, Olympus/Panasonic/Fuji not grear, and Nikon and Canon ones are fine. But Canon ones are only fine in Smooth Mode - turn that off, and it's back to close to Sony. Not played long enough with Nikon to see if changing settings makes it worse again. Now I'm not sure what magic that Smooth Mode does, but it really makes a huge difference for me. Now given Sony sell lots of mirrorless cameras, and lots of others praise the EVFs in other cameras I struggle with, clearly it's not an issue for most people and I suspect their brains are doing a fantastic job making the camera work. I further suspect that some others who do struggle with EVFs do so because of their own internal image processing, but I don't know of anyone else with my particular issue.
     
  16. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    To be fair Nick, Andrew did say "noticeable delay" and that would probably vary between users, yours being a fairly extreme case. I would expect that there are others who suffer the same problem, even if if it is to a lesser extent. I have no idea what delay is normally considered noticeable but it is worth remembering that when our eyes move the stop sending image data for processing but we don't notice the blanking. So I would imagine that there is a point at which the brain might interpret the delay as a blank and it wouldn't be visible, but I can't begin to prove that and anyway we haven't defined "noticeable".

    I am sure that for a great many people EVFs are absolutely fine but for a percentage of the population they aren't, for whatever reason, and that will always be the case. My problem is with those who can't understand that the EVF doesn't suite everybody and insist that the OVF is on its way out.
     

Share This Page